The 4-3 Under: Think 3-4 personnel and recruiting makes sense

Of the Bum Phillips scheme. Very effective hybrid style of 3-4 that isn't as reliant on the nose as a traditional scheme is.

Good discussion, clarified some points, esp why we didn't take more 0/1 tech guys.

Thanks

Thank you, very interesting, but didn't you forget my boy Des Morgan?

Awesome post. We've had some great diaries this week.

The pictures of the 4-3 base and 4-3 under look like they have the ends and tackles in the exact same place.  I have very limited knowledge of defenses, what am I missing?

That's a very nice compare/contrast explanation of the 4-3 under vs 3-4.  Thanks!

Nice work - a very helpful summary.  Seems like you confused Chris Rock (NTCR) with Brennan Beyer, as it was Beyer who switched from WDE to SAM.  Rock will likely be one of those 3 tech/5 tech swing guys.  As for projecting which of the four LB recruits will be the SAM, I think even the coaches are not certain until they see them on the field, but perhaps RJS has the closest to ideal SAM physical attributes.

He would also project as an edge setting LB. The 2011 class (and Jake Ryan) look to be almost evenly split between tacklers--Poole, Morgan--and edge setters--Ryan, Beyer, and Clark. Adding Ojemudia, it looks like the 2012 class is primarily stocking up on tacklers as depth is  strong on the edge. Given the experience from 2008-2010, any semblance of a defensive plan moving forward is promising. With Mattison calling that shots, I am very optimistic about our defensive prospects in the next 5 years.

A very helpful reminder that the 4-3 under is in many ways more like the 3-4 than the classic 4-3. This makes me (a little) less nervous about us taking only one true DT in the 2012 class. Wormley and Godin seem like guys who will eventually grow nicely into that 3-tech DT/5-tech SDE role that Van Bergen was so effective in this year.

My question for the original poster would be: Who among the returning interior D-lineman (Campbell, Washington, Ash, Wilkins, Brink) do you see slotting in to the NT, 3-tech DT, and 5-tech SDE positions next year w/the departure of Martin, RVB, and Heininger?

This all makes sense but the staff is putting a lot of trust in Pipkins by taking one NT.   It would have been nice to see one more monster on the d-line (NT) as a security blanket.  Hoke is filling the o-line very nicely with quality and quantity and I would have liked one more stud on the inside of the d-line.   My point is Big Will was a 5 star out of high school and has been meh at best.   And the others have done a bunch of nothing so far.  

...front paged. Thanks for the great content.

And thanks for cleaning up the formatting as well. It's a Festivus Miracle!

Very well done

1. Readers should note that the defensive technique numbers, while similar, are different from what you hear from the M coaching staff.  A 5-technique to the OP is head up an OT, while a 5-tech to the M staff (and most coaches) is outside shade of the OT.
2. Under/Over are defensive fronts originally created by 50-front guys.  The 50 fronts are more similar to the 3-4 since both are "odd" defenses; i.e., fronts with an odd number of DTs, and always having a nose guard over the center.
3. 40 defenses adopted the Under front as a way to get more players on the LOS, with a stand-up player coming down, usually the SAM backer as the strong-side 9-technique with the 4 DL shifting toward the weak side.
4. I disagree that 3-4 coaches like to 2-gap.  Some do, but some like to slant, angle, or involve some other kind of movement 90+% of the time, in order to get their players into one defined gap.  I don't think I've ever seen anyone who plays a 4-man DL have their guys 2-gap.

Mods, this is not a quality post on football scheme and techniques.  You need to find someone who is qualified to screen these posts before front-paging them, just as you would for a post on other factual subjects.  Putting this post on the front page damages the credibility of this blog, in my opinion.

I'm pretty much ignorant to defenisive schemes. I tried to undersatnd this, but each figure used different symbols and I gave up.

I am still not clear exactly what these terms refer to....would someone please explain?

Excellent post thanks, a few comments.

1.  The point that the 3-4 and 4-3 under aren't too far apart is also made in this 11W post that some might find helpful as a second look. http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2010/08/2010-preview-the-ohio-state-3-4.html#comment-151037

2.  A difference obviously is that in the 4-3U the WDE is more endy, while in the 3-4 the OLB on that side is more linebacker.  Even so, the 2 OLBs in the 3-4 can have different points of emphasis and responsibilities.  Notre Dame calls them Cat and Dog and 1 has more rush responsibilities (Cat) and 1 has more coverage responsibilities (Dog).

3.  The similarities b/n the 3-4 and 4-3U may be brought more in relief by comparing botht o the 4-3 over.  I'm no expert but I think that the 4-3O has less specialized positions, lining up all 3 LBs across.

Good Stuff & the commenters too.

IMO, thinking about it this way also makes it clearer as to why the initial reaction is to flip the D-Line when the offense shifts it's strength (something a lot of people complained about early in the season).  Plus kids learning a new scheme in general.

I think with experience, the need to flip-flop your linemen when a TE switches sides after lining up goes away.  You can just shift down.

this is what makes this blog so superior to other blogs. This kind of depth of knowledge and discussion is unparalleled in any other blog I've ever been to.

Even though a 3-4 and to an extent the 4-3 under utilize only one main NT, why aren't we getting another NT recruit? I feel like we need another in case somebody doesn't turn out down the road. ( I haven't watched pipkins on film so maybe someone who has can give me the answer to my probably stupid question)